The World in 2014

Rugby World Cup

Hoping for a Rugby World Cup upset?

ALMOST two centuries ago David Ricardo explained his theory of comparative advantage, noting that nations do some things better than they do other things and should specialise in what they do best (even if what they do worse is still better than the efforts of others).

In the world of sport what the southern hemisphere nations—New Zealand, Australia and South Africa—do best is rugby union (though Australian and South African cricketers may disagree). Moreover, what they do best is normally better than anyone else's efforts. Their players have the same kind of fearsome muscle mass as their northern hemisphere equivalents in England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland and France, but simply have better technique and more flair. Last weekend, the poor Scots on their home turf were steamrollered 49-3 by New Zealand's awesome All Blacks. Wales, after a heroic performance, still lost to South Africa's Springboks 29-25.

But what has this got to do with 2011? The answer is that northern hemisphere rugby enthusiasts are already talking of the Rugby World Cup, which will kick off on September 9th in Auckland, New Zealand. More to the point, they spy signs of hope. In particular, they are exulting over England's dashing 35-18 triumph at Twickenham over Australia's Wallabies. Could there, therefore, be a sporting upset “down under”?

Quite possibly. After all, if the Wallabies have already proven beatable and the Springboks almost so, that just leaves the All Blacks. They have been the strong favourites in every World Cup since the first one in 1987—and yet the 1987 tournament was the only one that they managed to win. In 1991 they came third; in 1995 they lost in the final to a Mandela-inspired South Africa; in 1999 they came fourth; in 2003 third again; and in 2007 they were knocked out in the quarter finals by an inspired France.

In other words, the All Blacks have a history of disappointing Kiwi hopes when it matters most. That, it should be noted even by non-sports fans, could be bad news for John Key, New Zealand's prime minister. He faces re-election soon after the tournament. In the election that followed the 1999 All Blacks' failure, the government fell.

Watching agag as yet another all conquering All Blacks sweeps through the British Isles in the Autumn tests. Will the trend continue? Hopefully not for the All Blacks because next on their regular cycle of fun is a disappointing world cup. One has a sense of deja vu with all of this. It is one of the gross injustices of modern sport that one nation dominates so much in terms of innovation and performance, but does so mid-way between world cup cycles. Most recently the All Blacks have led the way in creating a winning formula to the new law changes (ELVs).

The last world cup was characterized by the magnificent Pumas and boring rugby as teams played ¨air rugby¨, opting to kick, rather than run. Defensive teams were trumps and consequently the Springboks ruled the roost with a awesomely powerful front five, an awesome scrumhalf and a good winger.

Naturally, it was the All Blacks that came to the rescue over the last three seasons with their brand of ¨offload rugby¨, with emphasis not on the tackle, but on the release (not retention) by the tackled. Yet again, the world watched at this wonderful rugby.

But, the copy cats are catching up. The magnificent flying Wallaby backs out ran and out attacked the All Blacks in Hong Kong a few weeks ago. England are finally getting their mix right with a scarey depth of talented youngsters. France? Well, the French.

But, all the above having been said,the greatest challenge to the All Blacks, is the All Blacks. It is no longer an unfounded claim, it is a description. They choke. They are chokers. To think, that with the same coach (Henry), the same captain (McCaw), the same playmaker (Carter) and playing at home under infinitely more pressure, they are not going to choke, as they have done before, is not naive, it is daft.

I won´t state the over-used definition of insanity. Rather, I will borrow Cicero...¨any man may make a mistake, but only a fool persists in it...¨. What we witnessed against the French in the last world cup was stark proof that something was very wrong with the All Black preparation. I am not so sure the same protagonists have made the necessary development and changes.

The results of the Autumn test series are only relevant in terms of what team is likely to beat the All Blacks in the next world cup in New Zealand.

The rugby world cup is a knock out competition (beyond the make-up-the-numbers pool stage). Even a team like the current All Blacks, with a win record of 80percent, will 'only' have a 50percent chance of making and winning the final. Assume one of these games is more like 50/50 and the chance of winning the cup drops to 1/3. Sure they are still massive favourites compared to the other 7 quarter finalists, but even with a team as good as the AB's it is unrealistic to expect them to win every world cup.

Drop the win loss ratio to 2:1 and a team is now about a 27percent chance to win the whole thing. I'm a big NZ fan, but I'd be the first to admit that in a must win-game against a another top 5 team the odds won't be better than 2:1

So, excluding 1987, this means NZ is about 1.35 world cups in arrears (27]pct multiplied by 5 tournaments). Still a poor record, but given all the other great things the current All Blacks have done in the last 8 years, it's one I'm prepared to live with.